To what disputed law or legal practice would you apply the above description? Present and past, in the realm of equality and individual rights, we have contended over - to name some of the high profile issues - slavery, civil rights and voting rights for African Americans, for women, for Native Americans, Jim Crow laws, laws of segregation, immigration (and the favored vs. non-favored status of various countries), rights of legal immigrants and of undocumented immigrants, homosexual rights, homosexual marriage, and presently, the status of and equality for transgender and gender nonconforming individuals.
Taking the statement of human equality expressed in the Declaration of Independence as an ideal, we can observe that constitutional and legal history in the United States has been one of starting with a default position of denying equality and rights to any and all excluded or minority groups, and while slowly and painfully, with much blood, sweat and tears, moving toward equality. One would question why we as a people cannot more readily learn from our unfortunate history of denying individual rights?
In broader application, resistance and protest has also applied to anti-war efforts, workers rights issues, environmentalism, resistance to corporate activity in various forms, and the abortion debate. In those cases in which major legislation has been passed to address civil rights, voting rights, fair housing, employment discrimination, and discrimination in facilities and accommodations, the detailed terrain of rights and equality is ever shifting, and the forms of restriction or suppression of individual rights - legal, commercial, cultural - are subject to wide creativity.
These issues were on display in the national debate over slavery and likewise in specific legal disputes within the slavery question, most notably, the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850. (Note 1) The words in the opening paragraph above come from Henry Mayer's description of that time. Further, citing the religious dimension, Meyer points out that "both sides approached it in the framework of Christianity, with the conservatives holding fast to the ethic of Biblical patriarchy and the radicals reiterating the principles of Protestant nonconformity. (Mayer, 412-413) Clerical apologists for slavery pointed out that "obedience to governments, in the exercise of their legitimate powers, is a religious duty" and disobedience would "mock God and destroy the Union." The New England Antislavery Society had evolved to a clear expression of "civil disobedience" stating that "an argument on a issue of conscience that bade one to submit his moral convictions and square his actions by the votes of a majority is anti-republican, tyrannical, unchristian and atheistical." (Mayer, 413)
1. Advocacy, lobbying, criticism or protest of an institution, practice, or law: The core of William Lloyd Garrison's abolitionist strategies was always "moral suasion," the attempt to change the minds and hearts and therefore the practice of the slave holder by moral and religious argument. Thus the newspaper and public speaking were the venues of engagement. Garrison was relentless and persistent, never missing a week of publication with The Liberator until emancipation was gained, and he infused an intense and dedicated organizing component to the movement. The main organization carrying abolitionist banner was the American Ansislavery Society (AAS), and their protest message also included emphasis on citizenship and racial equality (resistance to discrimination) for blacks, and increasingly, in the later years of the movement, women's rights.
2. Passive resistance in the form of withdrawal or non-participation. In the later stages of the abolition movement, Garrisonian civil resistance included "disunionism," calling for withdrawal from the political process altogether, based on the notion that the constitution was inherently pro-slavery and thus flawed, and likewise the federal government as a whole in its complicity with slavery. The slogan of this principle was "No Union with Slaveholders." In the religious realm, Garrison came to espouse "come-outerism," advocating complete withdrawal and disassociation from religious groups that tolerated or supported slavery.
3. Engaging in specific countercultural activities in violation of an institution or practice: Sarah and Angelina Grimke exemplified the above passive resistance by completely withdrawing from the slaveholding culture of their wealthy family in Charleston, South Carolina, and relocating to the free state of Pennsylvania. Eventually, they were presented with an opportunity to take a more active role as the first women agents of the American Anti-slavery Society. In this role, they defied convention not only by their activism against the institution that was practiced in their own family and community of origin, but further challenged the established custom which prevented women from speaking to mixed groups or groups of men. The opposition to the antislavery movement from religious or political opponents often took extreme forms. (Note 2) The courage of the Grimke sisters to travel and speak in the face of opposition entailed also the next level of resistance below. Notable among the countless activists was also Sojourner Truth, a survivor of slave abuse who engaged in a lengthy career as a preacher, abolitionist and feminist activist, fighting through discrimination at every turn.
4. Nonviolent protest and resistance in the face of violent opposition: In general, due to the sensitivity of the slavery issue and the stakes of the debate, opponents of slavery encountered not only vocal opposition but violent resistance to their activism. Theodore Dwight Weld modeled resistance by leading a campus revival on the subject of abolition at Lane Seminary in Cincinnati in 1834, and later, when the seminary leadership took up a position forbidding abolition activities at the school, Weld and a group of dissenters left with the ambition to found a new seminary committed to free speech (to become Oberlin College). (Mayer, 195) Years later, Lane became one of the most courageous agents of the AAS. Lerner describes the methodology of the travelling group of agents. "Every effort was made to deny them (abolitionists) a hearing, frighten their audiences away and keep free Negroes from attending their meetings. Usually the press prepared the ground for violence with a barrage of distorted interpretations of the abolitionist views or outright lies. At their meetings hecklers abounded, sometimes drummers or other kinds of noisemakers invaded the hall and kept up a steady racket. Frequently the speakers were pelted with rotten eggs and vegetables; at times they were hit with bricks, sticks or other handy weapons... In time Weld and his band came to consider a riot a part of their introduction to a community. Pacifists by conviction, they developed "non-violent resistance" into a working technique. On the first night in a new community their main task was to stand up to the mob without fear. Weld discovered that by folding his arms across his chest and calmly staring down a mob, he usually could impress the crowd enough to escape serious injury. The next night ... he would have found enough men curious to see what was the source of his courage to guarantee him a hearing. Often a few of these would form an escort and handle the disturbances. Once the audience was willing to listen, he would speak without further reference to the violence, using all his persuasiveness and oratorical skill. He would usually end up by making enough converts to form a committee to carry on the work after his departure ... in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Upstate New York and Rhode Island ..." (Lerner, 128)
Legal vs. illegal resistance: The above five forms of resistance generally fall within obedience to the law. The forms of resistance below entail breaking the law.
6. Civil disobedience for judicial challenge: Here the individual or group expects to be arrested with a willingness or intention to submit to the authorities and face the judicial process to challenge the law: This methodology was not generally employed in the antislavery movement because there was no legal (judicial or constitutional) mechanism to effectively uphold justice in the face of any civil disobedience act related to slavery. While this form of civil disobedience was not widely employed as a deliberate strategy by the abolitionists, it was common for black representatives of the movement (notably, Frederick Douglass) to intentionally face down and resist discrimination knowing they would face violence and possibly arrest. By contrast, this strategy was employed as a deliberate method with dramatic and far reaching success in the American Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s-60s. It was used with great effectiveness including individual (e.g. Rosa Parks in Montgomery) and group (e.g. sit-ins, freedom rides) direct action, protest, and legal challenge in application to a wide range of civil rights issues leading to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
9. Willingness to break the law and violate the rights of others in protection of self or others - forceful or armed resistance: Activists who freed slaves by breaking them out of local jails exemplify this level of resistance, which is above that of fleeing or avoiding the authorities. Likewise, the activity of vigilance committees as armed agents prepared to do harm to others in the fulfillment of their mission exemplify this level of resistance. A more extreme form of resistance entered the movement in the "bloody Kansas" era in which armed guerrilla bands sought out, fought, and killed their opponents and at times burned or destroyed homes and entire towns. In the case of the abolitionist movement, this activity was the prelude to war, although it would be approximately five years later.
10. Willingness to break the law and violate the rights of others in the form of armed resistance not for specific individual or community protection but for the cause at large. This level of resistance represents rebellion or an attempt at coups d'etat. John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry represented this level of armed resistance in the form of an effort to instigate a slave rebellion. (Note 4)
In recalling our story thus far, it should be noted that Frederick Douglass exemplified most of these resistance strategies in the span of his career. As a fugitive slave himself and by later aiding other fugitive slaves, he demonstrated levels (7) and (8). Later as an abolitionist activist, he represented (1), (3) and (4). Quite possibly, Douglass faced more direct violence as an abolitionist agent than any other individual - in danger of death by violent attack on several occasions - due to his boldness as well as his notoriety, also given the lengthy tenure in which he travelled from East to West tirelessly carrying the message of human dignity. In the middle of his career, he undertook his own publishing venture with The North Star and developed an alliance with Gerrit Smith and the Liberty Party and engaged in political and legislative activism, in contrast to the Garrisonian strategy of disunionism. (Blight, 213-215) Recognizing the extreme sensitivity of his role as a high profile model citizen having come up from slavery, Douglass walked a careful and pragmatic line as his career progressed, maintaining his focus in the work in which he was most effective. He spoke openly of the likelihood as well as the moral justification of armed and even violent resistance (recall his long-term relationship with John Brown, yet remaining separate from Brown's armed rebellion)(Blight, chapters 14, 15), but he continued to operate within the law as an orator, writer, organizer, and later as a diplomat. (Note 3)
The terms "nonviolent protest" and "civil disobedience" were not in use at the time of the abolitionist movement, but, as I argue here, the practices emerged in a wide range of resistance activities. As a historical note, Meyer points out that the philosopher Henry David Thoreau had written an article in 1849 with the title "Resistance to Civil Government," which received little attention, and did not seem to affect the movement or the common terminology in use. The principle at work, however, emphasized by Thoreau as well as by Garrison and others, was that of a "higher law" which justified opposition to unjust human laws. The "higher law" language was employed both in a religious and secular application. Thoreau's writings on the subject, for which he developed a philosophical justification, became prominent in subsequent years, as Meyer describes .. "Thoreau's essay, which was next reprinted in a posthumous collection of 1866 under the now-famous title Civil Disobedience, has become a landmark document in the dissenting tradition and was a major influence upon the nonviolent protest campaigns of M.K. Gandhi and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., with scant awareness of its roots in Garrisonian fanaticism." Mayer, 414
Photo credit: The Federalist Papers.org
To be continued.
COMMENTS AND CORRECTIONS ARE WELCOME.
This analysis of the levels of resistance is certainly open to challenge and revision.
(1) See Abolition Movement, 7: Compromise of 1850.
(2) See Abolition Movement, 3: The Remarkable Journey of the Grimke Sisters. On the subject of "religious" opposition, it should be noted that the abolitionist movement was, in essence, a religious movement. But as is often the case, institutional resistance to change and to activism characterized many local congregations which would not allow the women or in some cases the abolitionist agents to speak in their churches because (a) they were women or (b) their message against other Christians and churches that defended slave interests was so direct and uncompromising. Movement representatives did not hesitate to vilify slave holding interests, Christian or otherwise.
(3) See Abolition Movement, 4, 5, and 6 on Frederick Douglass.
(4) See Abolition Movement, 9: Radical John Brown.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Blight, D. W. (2018). Frederick Douglass. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Lerner, G. (1967). The Grimke Sisters from South Carolina: Pioneers for Woman's Rights and Abolition. New York: Schocken Books.
Mayer, H. (1998). All On Fire: William Lloyd Garrison and the Abolition of Slavery. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
Oats, S. B. (1970). To Purge This Land With Blood: A Biography of John Brown. Amherst, Massachusetts: The University of Massachusetts Press.
The Federalist Papers.org. https://thefederalistpapers.org/ebooks/on-the-duty-of-civil-disobedience